Self-Reference of the Constitutional State: A Systems Theory Interpretation of the Kelsen-Schmitt Debate
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Jurisprudence 2 (2):309-328 (2011)
This article reinterprets the Kelsen-Schmitt debate in the context of social systems theory and rethinks its major concepts as part of legal and political self-reference and systemic differentiation. In Kelsen?s case, it is the exclusion of sovereignty from juridical logic that opens a way to the self-reference of positive law. Similarly, Schmitt constructed his concept of the political as a self-referential system of political operations protected from the social environment by the medium of power. The author argues that the process of legal and political globalisation rules out the possibility of formulating substantive theories of the state associating this particular social organisation with metaphysical values and a self-validating collective identity. Kelsen and Schmitt continue to inspire current theories of non-metaphysical globalised law and politics. However, the constitutional state and sovereignty need to be reformulated as a meeting point of functionally differentiated and globalised legal and political communications and not as their ultimate end
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
JIŘÍ PŘIBÁŇ (2010). Multiple Sovereignty: On Europe's Self-Constitutionalization and Legal Self-Reference. Ratio Juris 23 (1):41-64.
Cesare Pinelli (2010). The Kelsen/Schmitt Controversy and the Evolving Relations Between Constitutional and International Law. Ratio Juris 23 (4):493-504.
Lars Vinx (2007). Hans Kelsen's Pure Theory of Law: Legality and Legitimacy. Oxford University Press.
Michael Salter (2013). Carl Schmitt on the Secularisation of Religious Texts as a Resacralisation of Jurisprudence? International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 26 (1):113-147.
Andreas Kalyvas (1999). Review Essay: Who's Afraid of Karl Schmitt. Philosophy and Social Criticism 25 (5).
Hans Kelsen (1992). Introduction to the Problems of Legal Theory: A Translation of the First Edition of the Reine Rechtslehre or Pure Theory of Law. Oxford University Press.
Andreas Kalyvas (2006). The Basic Norm and Democracy in Hans Kelsen’s Legal and Political Theory. Philosophy and Social Criticism 32 (5):573-599.
Jeffrey Seitzer (2001). Comparative History and Legal Theory: Carl Schmitt in the First German Democracy. Greenwood Press.
Carl Schmitt (1996). The Leviathan in the State Theory of Thomas Hobbes: Meaning and Failure of a Political Symbol. University of Chicago Press.
Vicente Medina (2002). Locke's Militant Liberalism: A Reply to Carl Schmitt's State of Exception. History of Philosophy Quarterly 19 (4):345 - 365.
Panu Minkkinen (2005). Why is Law a Normative Discipline? On Hans Kelsen's 'Normology'. Res Publica 11 (3):235-249.
Hans Kelsen (1990). General Theory of Norms. Oxford University Press.
Michael Salter (1999). Neo-Fascist Legal Theory on Trial: An Interpretation of Carl Schmitt's Defence at Nuremberg From the Perspective of Franz Neumann's Critical Theory of Law. Res Publica 5 (2):161-193.
Peter Langford & Ian Bryan (2013). Hans Kelsen's Concept of Normative Imputation. Ratio Juris 26 (1):85-110.
Added to index2011-12-19
Total downloads11 ( #326,420 of 1,934,517 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #434,193 of 1,934,517 )
How can I increase my downloads?